Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-03-23

uOuD = AT MS uOb pEEu8 - COuSltbuIiUudI
! lawyer. IS to the question of ouF cCnsti-
tiOnai powers, but after the able discus
siOnS and arguments Of members [ feIy
convinced that We are acting within the
scope of our powers and that the resolu-
ton should have been adopted. What
ever blame, credit or discredit attaches
10 the action CS the House, am willing
to bear my share. propose TO stand or
fall with those who advocated it. think
it now improper, since the question has
been brought, to go back and refer to
former actions. Ga February IS the
House passed q resolution excluding Mr..
Canaeld from the hall of representa-
tiVes on account of disrespectful
articles in the Express. 1t be-
came my duty to order the
execution of that resolution, which read
that he be excluded from the hall and
that the Sergeant alarms and DOOrkeeper
keep him excluded. Mr.. Dickson, the
DOOrkeeper, wrote me q note to know
how | construed the resolution, whether
it applied to the door or only to the rail
ing across the lobby. l wrote Mr.. Dick
son that it referred to the four walls of
the hail; that he could come to the door,
but not to allow him in the hall. l be-
lieved that was according to the rules
(from which Mr.. PendletOn read as fol-
lows: In order to be entitled to vote,
and to be within the bar OF the House,
member must be on the floor OF the nall
and within the walls inClOsing the same
and not outside Of any of the doors
leading out Of the hall, and he must vote
from his seat | believe his was cor
rect, and do not believe he was
improperly excluded. 1t is sill fancy about
my hiding behind the sleeves Of Mr..
Montgomery. l called Mr.. Garfield out
of the Senate and told him that if he be-
lieved he was right he could see Mr..
Montgomery. told him that if he could
make the oath under the charge Of as
sault l would hold Mr.. Montgomery free
T ON responsibility. l had no idea of be-
ing arrested myself, or that his conscience
was so nlmble as to enable him to make
oath that | had assaulted him. Anything
In the San Antonio Express that | en-
COureged the idea that | knew | would be
arrested is erroneous. | believe l have
made myself plain, and repeat that pro-
pose To stand with the House in whatever
blame attaches TO the House" APP
plause.
TO REGULATE SUITS FOR LIBEL.
TIE following is the full text of bill
introduced by Senator Glasscock to-day
Be it enacted ~ the Legislature Of the
state Of Texas:
Section | Every person shall be st lib
erry to speak, write or publish his opin-
ions on any subject, beng responsible for
the abuse of tina. privilege.
5 c. ,. In prosecutions and civil suits
instituted to recover damages fJr libelOus
publications, the truth of the alleged IL
belOus matter may be given in evidence,
auC shall constitute Justification thereof
and q complete defense to the suit.
Sec. 3. Before instituttng suit to re-
cover damages growing out of libelOus
publication, the party aggrieved shall
first give notice to the author of the pub
LEGATION of his intention to bring such
suit, and if within ten days
sitter the receipt of the notice,
the author of the publication
snail in like public manner fully, COM
pletely withdraw and retraCt the offensive
matter Of which the sggrieved party COM
plains, lthen such withdrawal and re-
traction shall operate as bar to any suit
thereafter instituted on account of the
libelOuS publication, unless the publica-
ton was the result of Ill ,Till or malice on
the part OF tue author.
Sec. 4. II the lIbeI0us publication pre-
Ceding be published or circulated by
q corporation, the notice mentioned in
the preceding section may be delivered
TO the president, secretary or other
managing officer of such corporation.
Sec. 5 This act shall take effect and
be in force from and after its passage.
1t is understood that he introduced this
bill by request. Whether it will be
reached in the short time before adjourn
meut is questionable.
THE SUPREME COURT.
The supreme court opens its Austin
session on the first Monday in April.
There will be about 200 cases on the
docket for the consideration of the court.
A RAILROAD BILL.
A bill to prescribe penalty for viola
ton Of section 5, article 10, of the COnsti
tutien came up in the Senate to-day. The
act provides in substance that any officer,
director, manager, superintendent, agent,
purchaser or lessee of any railroad COrpO-
ration or other corporation, who shall
consolidate the stocks, property, works
or franchise Of such cooperation with, or
lease, purchase, or in any way control the
stocks, property, works or franchise Of
any other railroad corporation owning or
having under Its control or management
a competing or parallel line, shall be
deemed guilty Of q felony and upon con-
victiOn shall be punished by confinement
in the state peniteutiary for a term of
not less than two nor more
than five years, and to act IS officer,
agent, manager, lessee or purchaser OF
any O'her railroad corporation owning or
having under its control or management
any parallel or competing line. subjects
them to the same penalties. The act also
makes al lines already operating under
consultations already made or entered
into by any such corporations guilty OF
new and continuing Offense, and their
agent, managers, lessees or purchasers
punishable uader the provisions of this act.
| The consideration of this bill aroused
spirited debate that conferred
upon the provision of the
constitution prohibiting such cor
solidation of stocks, property or fran
chise of railroads. Those opposing the
bill claimed that 1t wss retroactive inflts
operations, and would impair the rights OF
property acquired uader former purchas-
ers whose original owners might now
| be dead. 1t was also set forth that 1t
was not every inhibition in the COnstitu-
ton that justified penal statutes to car